472 replies to this topic

[Dimento Graven]

Vas79, on 07 January 2015 - 08:25 AM, said:

Once a planet is worked to 100% it would go into cool down on it's own and opens up the next planet in the corridor. The biggest issue for non NA units is that all the work you put in during your peak playing time can be for naught when the NA teams come on board and start playing.

Teng right now is sitting at 46% for the attackers with 27 attackers and 24 defenders. If it flipped at 100% sometime this afternoon it would give all of those players in that queue right now the feeling that they have accomplished something for their faction and it may allow for smaller units to end up gaining a planet with their tag on it.

It would also allow for the feeling of a more fluid front.

This is something else I'd be willing to try, though... It doesn't address turret runs at all as far as I can tell. If turret runs are truly a problem, any changes to this cycle you'd make to account for them?

[Tiger 6]

Vas79, on 07 January 2015 - 08:25 AM, said:

Once a planet is worked to 100% it would go into cool down on it's own and opens up the next planet in the corridor. The biggest issue for non NA units is that all the work you put in during your peak playing time can be for naught when the NA teams come on board and start playing.

Teng right now is sitting at 46% for the attackers with 27 attackers and 24 defenders. If it flipped at 100% sometime this afternoon it would give all of those players in that queue right now the feeling that they have accomplished something for their faction and it may allow for smaller units to end up gaining a planet with their tag on it.

It would also allow for the feeling of a more fluid front.

Alright! I like the sound of that. It kills 2 birds (maybe 3?) with 1 stone, and shouldn't require UI changes.

Back end code could still be a pig tho - Does anyone know what actually happens on the server side during the the cease fire? is it just to freeze the map and redraw it?

[Vas79]

To be honest I don't have an answer for that one, but since it is an issue that all of us faces and it detracts from the overall enjoyment of the game for all of us maybe we should come up with a group suggestion.

I do think that it might encourage people to play CW as it is now though if all the fights at all times felt like the meant something.

[Vas79]

One way to cut down on the turret runs might be to not allow the last couple of drops on a planet that would set it to 100% be ghost drops. That's just me spit balling an idea btw.

[Tiger 6]

Dimento Graven, on 07 January 2015 - 08:29 AM, said:

This is something else I'd be willing to try, though... It doesn't address turret runs at all as far as I can tell. If turret runs are truly a problem, any changes to this cycle you'd make to account for them?

It won't fix turret runs, but it might address the frustration of non NA timezone players doing the heavy lifting for their faction only to have it all undone when the larger NA population comes on line - a significant number of Liao's best units are EU or earlier like TCAF, yet they can't win a world for their faction because the planet can't change hands until 8pm PST.

(Long term it also might get rid of the need for the 8pm cut off for the west coast folks? - if I had to get all my CW gaming done by 8pm I'd be unhappy about it, that's for sure.)

Edited by Tiger 6, 07 January 2015 - 09:56 AM.

[Vas79]

It might have the knock on effect of more people playing if they know that the fight their in will count towards something. There is that level of motivation towards helping get the big win and own that planet.

And if more people play it might help cut down on the ghost drops, who knows.

Edited by Vas79, 07 January 2015 - 09:06 AM.

[Grynos]

They could also have the ceasefire on a rotating schedule as well. I mean I think that would be much easier to implement code wise. If they had a ceasefire every 20 or 28 hours( depending on your thought if it should be longer or shorter ). Then all the players will have a say in CW, with the constant rotation their will be times that NA have the same issues that Europe has had. But with it rotating every four hours it would give a broader coverage worldwide.

VAS79

I really like your idea. The thing that would concern me though is that there is no time limitations though. 15 wins is not alot of wins if that planet is swamped by attackers, especially if the attackers greatly outweight the defenders. Defending at that planet would only slow down the progress, not stop it or reverse it in any way. To extend your idea a bit, if they changed the system on how attacking vs defending worked in general, this could actually work. A successful defense changing the progress in favor of the defender would help a great deal in this aspect.

[Alexander Steel]

Maybe starting a planet at 0. +15 = Flip to the Attacker, -15 = Locked down by the defender.

Once either number is hit the planet gets locked down and can't be attacked by either side for X number of hours. So a successful defense of a planet ((that's strong enough)) can give the defenders a breather on that planet.

[Tiger 6]

In the event of an enemy turret drop occurring, make it so the defender would erase that win with the next successful defence of the planet?

[Vas79]

I would have no issue with the defenders being able to cease fire the planet, my thought with it was to allow an advance to keep moving and make the fronts much more fluid as I'm sure they would be with interstellar travel. A defender lock out could also lead to some interesting scenario's where you have units battling to keep that planet behind the front as it could be used as a potential counter attack point.

[Tumbling Dice]

As I was reading this thread a song became stuck in my head, constantly looping the lyric, "clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right"

[Tiger 6]

Wolfiac, on 07 January 2015 - 10:28 AM, said:

As I was reading this thread a song became stuck in my head, constantly looping the lyric, "clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right"

Welcome to my world, when I made my last post for Monday night (see page 3) I thought we were getting somewhere, and then the wheels fell off..

Hopefully back on track now tho.

[Grynos]

Tiger 6, on 07 January 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:

In the event of an enemy turret drop occurring, make it so the defender would erase that win with the next successful defence of the planet?

In a way yes, but essentially it should be harder to overtake a planet than to defend it. Most tactical theories state that you need a 3 to 1 ratio to overtake a defensive position from an enemy. This would only be a 2 to 1 ratio. It would also benefit from the skill aspect of what I think CW is suppose to be.

Wolfiac, on 07 January 2015 - 10:28 AM, said:

As I was reading this thread a song became stuck in my head, constantly looping the lyric, "clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right"

Here I am stuck in the middle with Goons....

SQUAWK

[Tiger 6]

Vas79, on 07 January 2015 - 10:20 AM, said:

I would have no issue with the defenders being able to cease fire the planet, my thought with it was to allow an advance to keep moving and make the fronts much more fluid as I'm sure they would be with interstellar travel. A defender lock out could also lead to some interesting scenario's where you have units battling to keep that planet behind the front as it could be used as a potential counter attack point.

Its a nice dream, but I think that will only happen if and when the NBT league gets sorted out

I considered limiting a factions' numerical advantage by only allowing a set number of attacking drops per hour, but then realised that would just push up the wait times - might be an option to prevent the final hour zerg rush tho?

[BlakeAteIt]

Alexander Steel, on 07 January 2015 - 10:10 AM, said:

Maybe starting a planet at 0. +15 = Flip to the Attacker, -15 = Locked down by the defender. Once either number is hit the planet gets locked down and can't be attacked by either side for X number of hours. So a successful defense of a planet ((that's strong enough)) can give the defenders a breather on that planet.

I do not hate this.

[Vas79]

What if each planet worked on a ticket system, each faction attacking and defending only had so many tickets per planet. Each mech death in match would represent one ticket lost. Once a faction's ticket count reached zero the planet would flip or you could take the planet by winning the zones by wiping out Omega.

Tie the ghost drops into the on planet ticket count, get your free win but lose half of the tickets participating in the drop. To go with an individual planet cool down they would need to allow more then one attack/defense on the borders to allow for more population playing then what a planet has allowances for.

It might also encourage attackers to fight more if they are having an issue winning zones, just wipe the enemy ticket count out.

[Dimento Graven]

Alexander Steel, on 07 January 2015 - 10:10 AM, said:

Maybe starting a planet at 0. +15 = Flip to the Attacker, -15 = Locked down by the defender.

Once either number is hit the planet gets locked down and can't be attacked by either side for X number of hours. So a successful defense of a planet ((that's strong enough)) can give the defenders a breather on that planet.

That's an idea I like.

Tiger 6, on 07 January 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:

In the event of an enemy turret drop occurring, make it so the defender would erase that win with the next successful defence of the planet?

This is also a good idea, perhaps to be combined with many of the other good suggestions... If a win is more or less meaningless a good defense from another match should over ride it... It also increases the value of an actual attack and an actual defense.

Vas79, on 07 January 2015 - 10:20 AM, said:

I would have no issue with the defenders being able to cease fire the planet, my thought with it was to allow an advance to keep moving and make the fronts much more fluid as I'm sure they would be with interstellar travel. A defender lock out could also lead to some interesting scenario's where you have units battling to keep that planet behind the front as it could be used as a potential counter attack point.

I agree with you there Vas. The current fronts are a bit... Stale and overly static. Planet progression should be "logical", we shouldn't have these unassailable islands sitting in the middle of everyone's territories like we do now.

Edited by Dimento Graven, 07 January 2015 - 11:03 AM.

[Grynos]

Tiger 6, on 07 January 2015 - 10:35 AM, said:

I considered limiting a factions' numerical advantage by only allowing a set number of attacking drops per hour, but then realised that would just push up the wait times - might be an option to prevent the final hour zerg rush tho?

The key is to lower the queue times, while making actual matches ( not ghost drops ) matter more to the planets success or failure. The way I suggested above does this.

[Dimento Graven]

Vas79, on 07 January 2015 - 10:51 AM, said:

What if each planet worked on a ticket system, each faction attacking and defending only had so many tickets per planet. Each mech death in match would represent one ticket lost. Once a faction's ticket count reached zero the planet would flip or you could take the planet by winning the zones by wiping out Omega.

Tie the ghost drops into the on planet ticket count, get your free win but lose half of the tickets participating in the drop. To go with an individual planet cool down they would need to allow more then one attack/defense on the borders to allow for more population playing then what a planet has allowances for.

It might also encourage attackers to fight more if they are having an issue winning zones, just wipe the enemy ticket count out.

You may have something here, though I'm not quite getting it, can you elaborate?

[Grynos]

Dimento Graven, on 07 January 2015 - 11:04 AM, said:

This is also a good idea, perhaps to be combined with many of the other good suggestions... If a win is more or less meaningless a good defense from another match should over ride it... It also increases the value of an actual attack and an actual defense.

Lol I think he has me on ignore, might want to tell him it was the Idiot's idea lol.